Search results

The chapter studies the flow experience among academicians and the determinants of flow initiation and development. The academicians’ studied, have both research and teaching duties. The data for the study is drawn from 12 interviews conducted with academicians in India, with science, social science, and statistics as their fields of study. The study finds that different psychological needs can lead to flow experiences. It is proposed that the relationship between flow and psychological needs is influenced by personality traits (openness to experience and conscientiousness), which are reflected in day-day behavior (spontaneity and structuring). Interaction between humans (either students or collaborators) induced and strengthened flow-like feelings and emotional well-being, subject to certain conditions. Problem solving was found to be the key determinant of flow. Overall flow was found to be higher among research-oriented people working in science.

The purpose of this conceptual paper is to broaden the understanding of the three negative member (bad apple) behaviors – withholding of effort, interpersonal deviance and negative affect – put forth by Felps et al. (2006).

An integrative review of extant literature was conducted to understand the impact of the negative member behaviors on other team members. Potential interventions to control this bad apple behavior are identified with supporting evidence from recent empirical studies.

A review of empirical findings in the literature indicate that perceived coworker loafing may lead to counterproductive work behavior toward coworkers and interpersonal deviance may affect the task cohesion of the group. However, the presence of affectively negative individuals is empirically proven to improve the group performance, especially when the group task is related to creativity or information processing (decision-making and idea generation).

Despite the empirical attention paid to “bad apple” behaviors, the implications for managing negative member behaviors are unclear and scattered. In this paper, building on the framework proposed by Felps et al. (2006), the authors focus on three behaviors and provide a concise review of literature and interventions to control or exploit these behaviors.